Kerala High Court
Space Employees Association vs Union Of India on 9 November, 1993
IN THE HIGH COURT OF KERALA AT ERNAKULAM
PRESENT:
THE HONOURABLE MR. JUSTICE A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR
WEDNESDAY, THE 23RD DAY OF JULY 2014/1ST SRAVANA, 1936
WP(C).No. 17249 of 2014 (E)
---------------------------------------
PETITIONER:
-------------------
SPACE EMPLOYEES ASSOCIATION,
REPRESENTED BY ITS GENERAL SECRETARY, REG.NO. 440/74,
AFFILIATED TO B.M.S, VIKRAM SARABHAI SPACE CENTRE,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 022.
BY ADVS. SRI. N. NAGARESH,
SRI.SHAJI THOMAS,
SRI.BINU PAUL,
SRI.T.V.VINU.
RESPONDENTS:
-----------------------
1. UNION OF INDIA,
REPRESENTED BY ITS SECRETARY,
DEPARTMENT OF SPACE,
NEW DELHI-110 001.
2. VIKRAM SARABHAI SPACE CENTRE,
REPRESENTED BY ITS CHIEF CONTROLLER,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 022.
3. SR. HEAD,
P.G.A, VIKRAM SARABHAI SPACE CENTRE,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 022.
4. REGIONAL LABOUR COMMISSIONER (CENTRAL),
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 022.
5. GENERAL SECRETARY,
I.S.R.O STAFF ASSOCIATION, V.S.S.C,
THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 022.
6. GENERAL SECRETARY,
I.S.R.O EMPLOYEES UNION,
V.S.S.C, THIRUVANANTHAPURAM-695 022.
R1 & R4 BY SRI.P.PARAMESWARAN NAIR,A.S.G OF INDIA,
R2 & R3 SRI.T.P.M.IBRAHIM KHAN,SENIOR PANEL COUNSEL,
R5 & R6 BY ADV. SRI.P.K.RAVISANKAR.
THIS WRIT PETITION (CIVIL) HAVING BEEN FINALLY HEARD
ON 23-07-2014, THE COURT ON THE SAME DAY DELIVERED
THE FOLLOWING:
Prv.
W.P.(C).NO.17249/2014 - E:
APPENDIX
PETITIONER'S EXHIBITS:
EXHIBIT P1: TRUE COPY OF THE CENTRAL CIVIL SERVICES (RECOGNITION OF
SERVICE ASSOCIATION) RULES, 1993 ISSUED UNDER GOVT. OF INDIA,
DEPT. OF PERSONAL & TRAINING, O.M.NO. 2/10/80-JCA,
DATED 09-11-1993.
EXHIBIT P2: TRUE COPY OF THE O.M.NO. 2/10/80-JCA DATED 31-01-1994.
EXHIBIT P3: TRUE COPY OF CIRCULAR NO. 1.17/07-PER/191 DATED 04-06-2007.
EXHIBIT P4: TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 27-05-2014 SUBMITTED BY THE
PETITIONER TO THE SECRETARY, DEPARTMENT OF SPACE.
EXHIBIT P5: TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER NO. L-11012/36/2005-L-1
DATED 22-02-2010 OF THE UNDER SECRETARY,MINISTRY OF
SHIPPING, ADDRESSED TO THE CHIEF LABOUR COMMISSIONER, NEW
DELHI.
EXHIBIT P6: TRUE COPY OF THE LETTER DATED 03-06-2014 SUBMITTED TO THE
4TH RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P7: TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR NO. ISRO HQ.ADMIN 7.6(1) 2014
DATED 05-06-2014, OF THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
EXHIBIT P8: TRUE COPY OF THE CIRCULAR NO. 1.17/14/PER DATED 12-06-2014 OF
THE 3RD RESPONDENT.
RESPONDENTS' EXHIBITS: NIL.
//TRUE COPY//
P.A. TO JUDGE.
Prv.
A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR, J.
.............................................................
W.P.(C).No.17249 of 2014
.............................................................
Dated this the 23rd day of July, 2014
J U D G M E N T
The petitioner, an association of employees working under the 2nd respondent, has approached this Court feeling aggrieved by the decision of the 2nd and 3rd respondent to conduct a referendum of employees associations. The case of the petitioner is essentially that, instead of the referendum, the 2nd and 3rd respondents ought to have resorted to the secret ballot process for the purposes of determining the employees strength under the various service associations under the 2nd respondent. When the case was taken up, it was brought to my notice that an identical issue had come up for consideration before a Division Bench of this Court and vide judgment dated 04.11.1999 in W.A.No.1470 of 1999, this Court had, in respect of the 2nd respondent Space Center, upheld the procedure followed by the 2nd respondent and refused relief to the appellants therein who mooted for the secret ballot process. Under these circumstances, respectfully following the judgment of the Division Bench, the prayers sought for in the writ petition have to be denied to the petitioner. The writ petition is accordingly dismissed following the judgment of the Division Bench. W.P.(C).No.17249 of 2014 2
2. A submission is made on behalf of the petitioner that the Division Bench had permitted the appellant in that case to approach the Government of India under Rule 10 with a request to consider the grievances raised by them with regard to the validity or otherwise of the rules, and a similar opportunity may be given to the petitioner in this writ petition as well.
I have heard counsel for the respondents on this issue and on a consideration on the same, I feel that, while dismissing the writ petition, the petitioner can nevertheless be given an opportunity to approach the Government of India with a request to consider a relaxation of the Rule prescribing the method of verification, of the employees strength under the various associations under the 2nd respondent. If the petitioner files a representation before the 1st respondent within a period of one week from today, the said respondent shall, on receipt of the same forward it to the person competent to consider the same and cause the representation to be considered by the said authority within a period of two months thereafter.
A.K.JAYASANKARAN NAMBIAR JUDGE mns/